Are you in favor of voting with paper ballots?

@PHlover19701 Properly done, a paper ballot is very secure indeed. Electronic voting could be, but it would need a very secure system indeed, and the Internet is too easily interfered with by outside organisations including hostile governments.

However I agree with your point about human weakness. Individuals can be influenced or bribed. Though by definition, a ballot means the influencer does not know how the victim actually voted.

@ArishMell Voting machines are never connected to the Internet (thats too high of a security risk)...they are each stand alone units. Officials must go to each machine to download via an encrypted file the number of votes that machine recorded for each candidate. The same as paper but much, much faster and with much less of the human factor.

@PHlover19701 That's reassuring. Thank you for explaining it.

@ViciDraco Sorr, I don't see the connection between methods and outcome.

Either way you asking voters their choice.

What you imply though is ballot-rigging, but that is very difficult if the ballot is operated properly.

I doubt an electronic method is necessarily any more secure than an electronic cystem. Indeed, if a national election is Internet-based, its security is compromised immediately.

You also imply the election identifying how individuals vote apparently because this can be done from paper ballot-slips. It would be easy to arrange an electronic voting system to collect that information, and covertly.

A proper ballot does not link individial to choice. In fact it would not even be a ballot, by definition.

@ViciDraco The "hanging chads" was a con job reason to recount 20 times because the one who lost could not let it go. if a HOLE is pushed thru a form next to a name...whether it fully falls out or not.....take a wild guess who they wanted to vote for?

@OriginalNedKelly
No I.D. required because everyone in Australia knows Ned!

@meJess Australia has that law. I don't know if it worsened, improved or had negligible effect on elections.

Some enthusiasts for compulsory elections suggest a box labelled "None of the above", though anyone who fails to understand the simple, proper word "Abstain" instead is not likely to make much of a reasoned choice anyway!

I oppose complusory voting but I have no sympathy for the wishy-washy excuses some trot out for being too idle to vote.

@meJess
It was actually the silent majority who never voted at all who put Trump back into the Oval Office, not the MAGA Republicans who actually voted for him. To NOT vote at all means that one did absolutely nothing to prevent Trump from becoming President, which means they're complicit in Trump becoming President.

@ArishMell @swirlie @meJess I'm in favor of a combination of mandatory voting and ranked choice voting. That way, you can vote for the person you really want, indicate who you'll settle for, and your vote doesn't roll over to the other person that you don't want.

@Alyosha ignorance sounds a lot more fun than crying about losing an election and being angry at everything

@Katie01 You don't have to be angry or cry. You vote for the best candidate, do a little dance, and hope for the best.

@Katie01 Crying and whining about losing an election for 4+ years is the definition of ignorance. You can spot those folks by looking for Red hats.

@EBSVC I certainly hope you're right.

@LordShadowfire Like I would oppose networking these things if you’re using voting machines.

But honestly why are paper ballots so much more secure? They can be forged same as anything else